By: Rebecca Hamm, Ed.D., R.T.(R)(CT) and Victoria Miller, PharmD, BCPS
The World Health Organization defines Interprofessional Education (IPE) as two or more professions learning about, from, and with each other.1 Traditionally, this involves face-to-face meetings, which may be challenging for institutions without affiliations or scheduling conflicts. Online IPE workshops address these issues, ensuring educational benefits and meeting ACPE accreditation for pharmacy programs. There are both benefits and challenges that have been described for online IPE activities.2,3
Benefits
- Improved scheduling between academic programs
- Increased access to students at different academic levels or disciplines
- Increased flexibility for student learners
- Review asynchronous material at students’ own pace
- Improve interaction and connectivity in synchronous live activities
Challenges
- Limited discussion for asynchronous activities
- Technical issues due to technology access disparities or user navigation limitations
- Facilitating breakout sessions may require more faculty participation
- Decreased student engagement online
Activity Planning
Planning for an introductory IPE event on healthcare providers’ roles and responsibilities revealed scheduling challenges due to online students and varied class schedules. To mitigate conflicts, the IPE Committee opted for an online format, incorporating both asynchronous and synchronous components. The IPE-1 Subcommittee collaborated on event design, receiving input and approval from the full IPE Committee for content accuracy and suitability for students across disciplines. IPE-1 learning outcomes are summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1.
| Learning Outcome | IPEC Competency Correlation* | Assessment Method |
| Examine the distinctive roles and responsibilities of healthcare professionals within an interprofessional team, highlighting their complementary nature. Mode of Learning: Asynchronous | RR1RR2RR3RR6RR10 | Read select IPEC pages and watched videos about roles of various healthcare professions; short quiz. |
| Define professionalism and outline national standards governing healthcare provider conduct. Mode of Learning: Asynchronous | VE3VE4 | Read select IPEC documents and read code of ethics for various healthcare professions; short quiz. |
| Examine the roles and responsibilities of healthcare professionals in a multidisciplinary case. Mode of Learning: Synchronous | CC3CC4CC6CC8 | Attended Zoom meeting and worked in multidisciplinary groups to identify the roles of healthcare practitioners in mini cases. |
| Reflect on personal attitudes, values, beliefs, and perceptions regarding interprofessional education and practice before and after completing the course. Mode of Learning: Synchronous | n/a | Completed discussion and post-survey at the end of the synchronous Zoom meeting. |
*Performed prior to IPEC 2023 competency update, IPEC 2016 competencies used.
Activity Description
Asynchronous tasks were hosted on our learning management system, providing prior exposure to IPE concepts, healthcare roles, and professional ethics before the synchronous session.
During the Zoom session, students were grouped into pre-assigned teams of 6-8, ensuring representation from multiple disciplines. In breakout rooms, they participated in icebreakers and collaborated on healthcare scenario quizzes. Faculty intermittently joined to monitor attendance and address queries. This setup allowed for low-pressure interaction among disciplines to discuss roles and responsibilities.
The session concluded with a final discussion and post-survey in the main room, promoting timely reflection. Synchronous survey distribution improved completion rates.
Pre-survey included:
- SPICE-R2 instrument to assess attitudes toward interprofessional teams
- Self-assessment for select Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Scale (ICCAS) statements
Post-survey included:
- Repeated ICCAS statements
- General feedback regarding IPE-1
Activity Effectiveness
The following healthcare programs participated in the Fall 2023 event: dental hygiene, health studies, medical laboratory scientist, nursing, occupational therapy assistant, pharmacy, physical therapy, radiologic technologist, and speech language pathology. ICCAS statements were used to evaluate the efficacy of the activity, and students submitted their self-evaluations of competency through Likert scale responses in a retrospective pre- and post-test design. Responses were evaluated using descriptive statistics and reported as median values and interquartile ranges (Table 2).
Table 2.
| ICCAS Competency Statement | Sample Size | Pre-Event Median (Interquartile Range) | Post-Event Median (Interquartile Range) |
| Learn with, from, and about IP team members to enhance care. | 346 | 3(3-4) | 5(4-5) |
| Identify and describe my abilities and contributions to the IP team. | 346 | 4(3-5) | 5(4-5) |
| Understand the abilities and contributions of IP team members. | 346 | 3(3-4) | 5(4-5) |
| Recognize how others’ skills and knowledge complement and overlap with my own. | 346 | 3(3-4) | 5(4-5) |
| Total Score (out of 20, summed) | 13(12-17) | 20(16-20) | |
Rating scale: 1=Poor, 2=Fair, 3=Good, 4=Very good, 5=Excellent
Lessons Learned
- Icebreaker questions in student groups foster dialogue and counteract decreased engagement in online platforms.
- Faculty facilitators in every breakout room aren’t necessary. Students prefer guiding discussions independently, as revealed in post-survey responses.
- An electronic quiz during small group discussions boosts engagement in synchronous sessions, avoiding grading issues posed by paper worksheets.
- Clear guidelines, strictly enforced, ensure student presence and engagement during synchronous activities (no multitasking or distractions).
While many students appreciated the convenience and efficiency of online IPE, some requested face-to-face events for better engagement. However, organizing face-to-face events for a large number of students on the same day poses feasibility challenges. Nonetheless, future IPE events aim to integrate both online and face-to-face components throughout the curriculum to provide exposure to both methods.
References:
- World Health Organization. Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education & Collaborative Practice. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/framework-for-action-on-interprofessional-education-collaborative-practice. Accessed February 26, 2024.
- Solomon P et al. Students’ perceptions of interprofessional learning through facilitated online learning modules. Medical Teacher. 2010;32(9):e391-398.
- Hayward K et al. IPE via online education: Pedagogical pathways spanning the distance. JIEP. 2021;24.
Author Bio(s):
Rebecca Hamm is an Associate Professor at the University of Louisiana Monroe College of Health Sciences. Educational scholarship interests include programmatic assessment, medical imaging procedure techniques, and interprofessional education. In her free time, Rebecca enjoys fishing, traveling, and reading.
Victoria Miller is an Associate Professor at the University of Louisiana Monroe College of Pharmacy. Educational scholarship interests include heart failure clinical practices and scholarship of teaching and learning. In her free time, Victoria enjoys reading and spending time with friends and family.
Pulses is a scholarly blog supported by a team of pharmacy education scholars.
Pulses 